Manchester City vs Chelsea: Matchup of Champs Proves City Is Still the Favorite
It may have been an exhibition match, but this clash of the Premier League champions and FA Cup winners said a lot.
Man City dominated the match after the Blues went down a man, and in a 12-minute period, City poured in three goals.
"City are the favourites, there is no doubt," Chelsea manager Roberto Di Matteo said after his side's 3-2 defeat.
"They are the champions and we have to catch up 25 points from last season. Manchester United will be chasing City as well. They have kept the squad together, I am not sure whether they are going to make any other signings but they are a strong team."
It all went wrong for Chelsea when Branislav Ivanovic made a terrible challenge with his cleats up, which earned him a red card.
At that point, right near the half, Chelsea had the lead and was looking great, but Ivanovic's reckless tackle opened up City's attack to move in on a full assault.
They took advantage too, attacking constantly and burring the Blues with a three goal outpouring in 12 minutes.
This is a disappointing result for a Chelsea squad that was looking to gel after a large amount of transfer period turnover.
Superstar striker Didier Drogba is gone, and Chelsea brought in a number of young, talented players to replace him, including Eden Hazard, Marko Marin and Oscar.
This was Di Matteo's first real chance to implement his new lineup, and the game was evidence that the group needs a lot more work to reach championship form.
Man City, on the other hand, was very quiet during the transfer period, and largely kept their 2011 roster intact.
It seemed to be the correct move on Sunday, as City looked to be in great form for next week's league opener.
Chelsea made a ton of moves designed to push them ahead of the Premier League champions, but for now at least, it looks as if the Blues have a long way to go.
Manchester City can be quite happy with the result though. Because, as of now, they still look primed to repeat as champions.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?